Advertisement

Systematic Interpretation and the Re-systematization of Law: The Problem, Co-requisites, a Solution, Use

  • Ivan L. PadjenEmail author
Article
  • 21 Downloads

Abstract

A renewed search for legal certainty is a reaction to the preponderance of judge made law, which has been in turn prompted by the democratic deficit of the EU and the impact of Anglo-American law. The problem is that the search is oblivious to both systematic interpretation and the need of re-systematization of law. The paper defines systematic interpretation, relates the definition to standard French and German conceptions, indicates the room for systematic interpretation in Anglo-American laws, and states prima facie reasons for a re-systematization of law as a prerequisite of systematic interpretation. The problem cannot be appreciated outside its proper context. It is a disregard for causation and evaluation. Hence the paper outlines Aristotle’s understanding of causation and evaluation in his presentation of phronesis, reconsiders continental European legal thought in the light of Aristotle’s presentation, and offers policy-oriented jurisprudence as a remedy to the deficit of evaluation and causation in European legal thought. A solution to the problem offers a typology of criteria and clarifies positive and fundamental legal concepts, positive and fundamental criteria of systematization, and the place of criteria in knowledge of law. The usefulness of the criteria is demonstrated by a common approach to the systematization of law and an alternative diagnosis of a defect of systematization diagnosed by an authority in history and philosophy of law rather than legal theory.

Keywords

Systematic interpretation Systematization of law Causation Evaluation Phronesis Policy-oriented jurisprudence 

Notes

References

  1. 1.
    Aristotle. 1984. Nicomachean Ethics Book VI, 1138b18-1145a11, trans. W. D. Ross, The Complete Works of Aristotle: The Revised Oxford Translation, vol. 2. ed. J. O. Urmson. Princeton NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Berthold, J., and Huegli, Anton. 2004. Wertphilosophie. In Historisches Woerterbuch der Philosophie Bd. 12W-T.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Birnbacher, Dieter. 1973. Die Logik der Kriterien: Analyse zur Spaetphilosophie Wittgenstein. Hamburg: Meiner.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bjoerne, Lars. 1984. Deutsche Rechtssysteme im 18. und 19. Jahrhunderts. Ebelsbach: Gremer.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Burazin, Luka. 2017. Pojam prava i (društvena) učinkovitost. In Pravni vjesnik 33(3–4).Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Cappellini, Paolo. 1984. Systema iuris. Milano: Giuffre.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Cathrein, Victor. 1931. Der Zusammenhang der Klugheit und der sittlichen Tugenden nach Aristoteles, Scholastik: Vierteljahrschrift fuer Theologie und Philosophie, Bd. VI. repr. Hager: Fritz.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Cathrein, Victor. 1972. Ethik und Politik des Aristoteles. Darmstadt: Wissentschafliche Buchgesellschaft.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Dewey, John. 1920. Reconstruction of Philosophy. New York: Henry Holt and Co.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Dorsey, Gray L. 1989. Jurisculture: Greece and Rome. New Brunswick NJ: Transaction Publishers.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Dworkin, Ronald. 1977. The model of rules. In Taking Rights Seriously. London: Duckworth.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Duxbury, Neil. 2008. The Nature and Authority of Precedent. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Engberg-Pedersen, Troels. 1983. Aristotle’s Theory of Moral Insight. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Engisch, Karl. 1971. Einfuehrung in das juristische Denken, 5th ed. Stuttgart: Kohlhammer.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Esser, Josef. 1990. Grundsatz und Norm in der richterlichen Fortbildung des Privatrechts (1956), 4th ed. Tuebingen: Mohr.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    ed. Fenwick, Mark, Siems, Mathias M., and Wrbka, Stefan. 2017. The Shifting Meaning of Legal Certainty in Comparative and Transnational Law. Oxford: Hart.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Fuller, Lon L. 1969. The Morality of Law, rev ed. New Haven CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Goodhart, Arthur. L. 1934. Precedent in English and continental law. In Law Quarterly Review 50.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Habermas, Juergen. 1973. Theory and Practice. Trans. Boston: Beacon Press.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Hallis, Friedrich. 1930. Corporate Personality: A Study in Jurisprudence. London: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Hardie, William F.R. 1980. Aristotle’s Ethical Theory, 2nd ed. Oxford: Clarendon Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Hart, Herbert L.A. 1961. The Concept of Law. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Hohfeld, Wesley Newcomb. 1918. Fundamental legal conceptions as applied in judicial reasoning. The Yale Law Journal 26(8).Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Holmes, Oliver W. 1982. The Common Law (Lecture VI. Ownership and Possession). London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Huegli, A., Schlotter, S., Schaber, P. and Roughley, N. 2004. Wert. In Historisches Woerterbuch der Philosophie Bd. 12W-T.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Hubmann, Heinrich. 1977. Wertung und Abwaegung im Recht. Koeln: Heymanns.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Kaufmann, Arthur, Winfried Hassemer, and Ulfried Neumann (eds.). 2011. Einfuehrung in die Rechtsphilosophie und Rechtstheorie der Gegenwart, 8th ed. Heidelberg: Mueller.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Kelsen, Hans. 1961. General Theory of Law and State. Trans. Anders Wedberg New York: Russell & Russell.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Kelsen, Hans. 1964. Gott und Staat. In Aufsaetze zur Ideologiekritik. Neuwied a.R.: Luchterhand.Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Landeka, Nada. 2017. Političari u službi sudaca, suci u službi političara [Politicians in the Service of Judges, Judges in the Service of Politicians]. HAZUD Retrieved on 31.1.2018 from www.hazud.hr/politicari-sluzbi-sudaca-suci-sluzbi-politicara.
  31. 31.
    Lasswell, Harold D., and Abraham Kaplan. 1950. Power and Society. New Haven CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Lasswell, Harold D. 1971. A Pre-view of Policy Sciences. Amsterdam: Elsevier.Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Lasswell, Harold D., and Myres S. McDougal. 1992. Jurisprudence for a Free Society. Dordrecht: Nijhoff.Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Linarelli, John. 2017. Legal certainty: A common law view and a critique. In The Shifting Meaning of Legal Certainty in Comparative and Transnational Law. Oxford: Hart.Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Lukić, Radomir D. 1976. Uvod u pravo [Introduction to Law], 2nd ed. Beograd: Naučna knjiga.Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Malenica, Antun. 2006. Podele stvari i pojam’stvar’ u rimskoj pravnoj doktrini [Divisions of things and the concept of 'a thing' in Roman legal doctrine]. In Zbornik radova Pravnog fakulteta u Novom Sadu 50(1).Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Marochini, Maša. 2013. Socio-Economic Dimension of the European Convention of Human Rights: Should There be Limits in The European Court of Human Rights Reading Significant Socio-Economic Elements into Convention Rights?. Rijeka: Faculty of Law, University of Rijeka.Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Meyer, Ernst. 1984. Grundzuege einer Systemorientierten Wertungsjurisprudenz. Tuebingen: Mohr.Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Padjen, Ivan. 2015. Metodologija pravne znanosti: pravo i susjedne discipline [Methodology of Legal Science: Law and Related Disciplines]. Rijeka: Pravni fakultet Sveučilišta u Rijeci.Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Padjen, Ivan. 2016. A policy-oriented search for basic European values. In Dignitas 71–72.Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Padjen, Ivan. 2016. Reinventing systematic interpretation: Criteria and uses of the tripartition into public, private, and social law. In a paper submitted to Modern Legal Interpretation: Legalism or Beyond? 8th Conference on Legal Theory, Legal Argumentation and Legal Philosophy (sponsors: European Faculty of Law & School of Government and European Studies; Ljubljana, 18-19 November 2016), ed. Marko Novak and Vojko Strahovnik. London: Routledge. (in press).Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Paust, Jordan. 1979. The concept of norm: A consideration of the jurisprudential views of Hart, Kelsen and McDougal-Lasswell. In Temple Law Quarterly 52(1).Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Randall, David. 2011. The prudential public sphere, In Philosophy and Rhetoric 44(3).Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    René, David. ca1974. In International Encyclopedia of Comparative Law 2, ch. 2. Tuebingen: Mohr.Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    ed. Ritter, Joachim, Gründer, Karlfried and Gabriel, Gottfried. 1971-2007. Historisches Woerterbuch der Philosophie 13 Bde. Basel/Stuttgart.Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Robinson, Richard. 1950. Definition. Oxford: Clarendon.Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Saegesser, Barbara. 1975. Der Idealtypus Max Webers und der Naturwissenschaftliche Modellbegriff: Ein begriffskritischer Versuch. Basel: Birkhaeuser.Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Sajama, Seppo. 1985. Dužnost i vrijednost [Duty and value] trans., In Zbornik Pravnog fakulteta Sveučilišta u Rijeci (6).Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    Sampford, Charles. 1989. The Disorder of Law: A Critique of Legal Theory. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  50. 50.
    von Savigny, Carl Friedrich. 1840. System des heutigen roemischen Rechts, vol. II. Berlin: Bei Veit & Co.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Schroeder, Jan. 1979. Wissenschaftstheorie und Lehre der ‘praktischen Jurisprudenz’ auf deutschen Universitaeten an der Wende zum19. Jahrhundert. Frankfurt a.M.: Klostermann.Google Scholar
  52. 52.
    Siedentop, Larry. 2014. Inventing the Individual: The Origins of Western Liberalism. London: Allen Lane.Google Scholar
  53. 53.
    Summers, Robert S. 1982. Instrumentalism and American Legal Theory. Ithaca NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
  54. 54.
    Summers, Robert S., and Michele Taruffo. 1991. Interpretation and comparative analysis. In Interpreting Statutes: A Comparative Study, ed. Neil McCormick and Robert S. Summers. Aldershot: Dartmouth.Google Scholar
  55. 55.
    Taylor, Charles. 1973. Neutrality in political science. In The Philosophy of Social Explanation, ed. Alan Ryan. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  56. 56.
    Terré, Françoise. 1991. Introduction générale au droit. Paris: Dalloz.Google Scholar
  57. 57.
    Tucak, Ivana. 2012. Hohfeld’s concept of immunity. In Dignitas 53-54.Google Scholar
  58. 58.
    Tucak, Ivana. 2016. Hohfeldova analitička teorija prava. Osijek: Pravni fakultet Sveučilišta Strossmayer.Google Scholar
  59. 59.
    Vesting, Thomas. 2015. Rechtstheorie: Ein Studienbuch, 2nd ed. Muenchen: Beck.Google Scholar
  60. 60.
    Villey, Michel. 1969. Droit subjectif I: la genèse du droit subjectif chez Guillaume d’Occham”, extrait de Archive de philosophie du droit (1964), repr. In Seize essais de philosophie du droit dont un sur la crise universitaire Paris: Dalloz.Google Scholar
  61. 61.
    Villey, Michel. 1983. Le droit et les droits de l’homme. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.Google Scholar
  62. 62.
    Vogenauer, Stefan. 2001. Die Auslegung von Gesetzen in England und auf dem Kontinent, vol. I. Tuebingen: Mohr Siebeck.Google Scholar
  63. 63.
    Weber, Max. 1968. ‘Objektivitaet’ sozialwissenschaftlicher und soziopolitischer Erkenntnis, in Gesammelte Aufsetze zur Wissenschatfslehre, 3rd ed. Tuebingen: Mohr.Google Scholar
  64. 64.
    Wiedmann, F., and Biller, G. 1976. Klugheit. In Historisches Woerterbuch der Philosophie, Bd. 4, I-K. Basel-Stuttgart; Schwabe.Google Scholar
  65. 65.
    ed. Wright, James. 2001. International Encyclopedia of the Social and Behavioral Sciences, 28 vols., Amsterdam.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty of LawUniversity of RijekaRijekaCroatia
  2. 2.Faculty of Political ScienceUniversity of ZagrebZagrebCroatia
  3. 3.ZagrebCroatia

Personalised recommendations